If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

As the whirlwind of racial strife still whirs, even a full month after the George Zimmerman verdict, Bill O'Reilly, Don Lemon, Oprah Winfrey, and Al Sharpton are overlooking something.
The most blatant contempt toward black Americans I've seen recently has come from none other than the organized leadership of the LGBT lobby.

Donnie McClurkin, an award-winning musician, was supposed to perform at the fiftieth anniversary of Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s march on Washington. McClurkin is a black Christian who has come forward with an inspiring life story. He was molested as a boy and developed homosexual behaviors, possibly as a result of the trauma. Later his faith helped him to overcome his homosexual desires and live a more biblical life.

Under pressure from gay power activists in Washington such as Phil Pannel, the mayor of Washington, D.C., Vincent Gray, decided to drop McClurkin from the concert. McClurkin was humiliated. LGBT activists felt that someone who had called homosexuality a "sin" could not perform at a concert commemorating the life and work of a black Christian reverend.

There has been a string of global clashes between LGBT activists and black Christians -- not only in the U.S., but abroad. African-American Christian Angela McCaskill nearly lost her job at Gallaudet University for signing a petition about gay marriage, even though it wasn't clear that she was signing in protest against it.

Crystal Dixon was an African-American administrator in Toledo who authored a rebuttal against someone who'd accused the University of Toledo of economic discrimination against homosexual couples. Dixon said, "I take great umbrage at the notion that those choosing the homosexual lifestyle are 'civil rights victims.' Here's why. I cannot wake up tomorrow and not be a Black woman." She went on to clarify the illegitimacy of the economic comparison:

Economic data is irrefutable: The normative statistics for a homosexual in the USA include a Bachelor's degree: For gay men, the median household income is $83,000/yr. (Gay singles $62,000; gay couples living together $130,000), almost 80% above the median U.S. household income of $46,326, per census data. For lesbians, the median household income is $80,000/yr. (Lesbian singles $52,000; Lesbian couples living together $96,000); 36% of lesbians reported household incomes in excess of $100,000/yr. Compare that to the median income of the non-college educated Black male of $30,539. The data speaks for itself.

Dixon's point is particularly important to keep in mind when we consider the case of Edie Windsor, who was the plaintiff in the DOMA case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in late June. Windsor, a white lesbian, sued because her lesbian partner's estate amounted to $3.5 million, as Patrick Deneen has pointed out. Not content with this gargantuan estate, Windsor won her legal case and is now set to receive $360,000 more.

Crystal Dixon was fired from her job; she sued and lost her case.

Julea Ward was a graduate student at Eastern Michigan University. She asked to refer a client to a different counselor, based on the fact that her religious beliefs disallowed her from affirming an unchaste homosexual relationship. As Jeremy Tedesco points out:

Her objection is to providing counseling on certain topics, not to counseling any particular group.

So the claim that Julea refused to see clients who identified as gay is patently false.

The actual facts are that Julea faced a values conflict when a potential client sought counseling about a homosexual relationship. Recognizing the likely values conflict with the client, she asked her professor whether she should refer him before any meeting took place and was instructed to do so. But the University charged Julea with "imposing values" on the potential client, and disobeying ethical rules that apply to counselors. It then expelled her from the program, even though she was a stellar student who was carrying a 3.91 GPA.

She won her case, but only after fighting tooth and nail. Ward, Dixon, McCaskill, and McClurkin can join up with Roland Martin, the African-American CNN correspondent who was suspended for "offensive" tweets about David Beckham posing in his underwear.

What is the ideology of the LGBT lobby, by the way? And why does it seem to clash so incessantly with the views of black people, who are -- with the notable exception of Jason Collins, Barack Obama, and Obama's die-hard followers -- unimpressed with the comparison between their lives and the claims of the LGBT lobby?

People who love the same sex come with many different agendas and experiences. The peculiar ideology of the LGBT lobby, however, seems fashioned perfectly to inflame the rage and resistance of African-Americans. First, the ideology is based on biological determinism. The repeated appeals to the Fourteenth Amendment depend upon the notion that homosexuals are born with their orientation in the same way black people are born with dark skin. This isn't the most inviting way to start a comparison: "Hi, I'm a guy who loves playing with other men's genitals, and that's just like you being black!"

There is an added dimension to this dangerous form of essentialism, however. The LGBT lobby is driven by the belief that people whom they classify as "born homosexuals" must engage in the actual acts of sexual gratification with the same sex, or there is something wrong with them. Within this logic, it is impossible to go from homosexual activity to non-homosexual activity. So convinced are LGBT activists of this rejection of free will and self-control that they have moved to make it illegal in California, New Jersey, and Massachusetts for counselors to help minors cease or avoid sexual activities with the same sex.

The LGBT lobby also demands that same-sex couples have the right to be parents. Here is where the movement becomes utterly irreconcilable with black history, regardless of how much Melissa Harris-Perry may enjoy her repartee with Thomas Roberts. For same-sex couples to become parents, they must purchase children. They won't call it that, of course. But buying sperm from a sperm-bank or renting a woman's womb both entail the exchange of money for ownership of a child. The state is then embroiled in the arrangement as an enforcer of the contract, compelling the child and third parties to respect the authority of two adults, one or both of whom are unrelated to the child, and both of whom came into possession of a dependent human being through money. (Those high incomes that Crystal Dixon pointed out among gay couples come in handy.)

How does this sound for a race of people who came out of slavery? Do you think it makes sense to tell black people, who were treated as chattel and stereotyped as savages incapable of self-control, that they ought to jump on board?......

It's actually very well argued. The comments are interesting. Here is one I found:

acidulous
14 hours ago

You are the ONLY one who has pointed out that the recent decision by the Supreme Court to overturn thousands of years of culture and history to accommodate the homosexual agenda was begun by a plaintiff who WANTED MORE MONEY. Greed. That which the left always says of the right, And it's about time the topic is amplified. It's all about FEDERAL BENEFITS, INHERITANCE, TAX BREAKS. In fact when the topic of "gay" marriage first broke into the mainstream it was attached to some who complained they were not allowed to INHERIT (tax free) from their "partners".

And as you correctly point out, homosexuals earn far more than the average black person, and in fact, that goes for white people too. They are better educated, earn more, enjoy better housing, and in general have a hell of a lot more disposable income than the average schlub. They are well off, well educated, and well housed. So when the screaming starts about being "oppressed" it's enough to make anyone go off the rails. Ideology and money brought us to this point. Radicalism, hatred, and GREED.

Homosexuals should not have a "right" to children they cannot conceive if they stick to the sexual activities they say they cannot alter. It is a giant experiment with children' lives to throw them into same sex parenting situations they have never encountered in such numbers throughout history. It is an unconscionable unethical risk to take with vulnerable lives. Voluminous studies have established that a child's optimal chance of growing up happy and healthy is with his biological parents and sibs. Any alteration such as divorce and a step parent increases risk to the child. Same sex parenting alters so many variables that it must also increase risk: half or full biological orphanhood, separation from any sibs, missing one gender role model, often his/her own, thrown into the often promiscuous circle of 3% of the population rather than the one to which he/she was born (97% of the time heterosexual), courts often awarding 3 or more warring adults (sperm/egg donors/ surrogate/2 gay parents) equal rights over the child. No long term study has been done about whether such children end up sexually and otherwise well adjusted adults. Previous studies of the optimal situation and the many departures homosexual 3rd party parenthood bring from the optimal suggest risk to the child.

Donnie McClurken has been targeted before this, because I remember posting something about it back when I was still posting at DU. I said words to the effect that he speaks for his own experience, not the experience of all gay people everywhere. They didn't want to hear that.

He has an amazing voice, and that's all that should matter when musical acts are being chosen for an MLK tribute.

"Robert Oscar Lopez is currently a rising star in anti-gay circles. ThinkProgress has previously described him as "an 'ex-gay' bisexual who blames his adult social dysfunction on having been raised by a lesbian mom." Lopez's "testimonies" have been used by the likes of NOM and the American Family Association to perpetuate the erroneous idea that gay parenting is inherently related to child abuse, and increases their risks of falling victim to to exploitation and child abuse."

"Robert Oscar Lopez is currently a rising star in anti-gay circles. ThinkProgress has previously described him as "an 'ex-gay' bisexual who blames his adult social dysfunction on having been raised by a lesbian mom." Lopez's "testimonies" have been used by the likes of NOM and the American Family Association to perpetuate the erroneous idea that gay parenting is inherently related to child abuse, and increases their risks of falling victim to to exploitation and child abuse."

I'm aware of who he is. That doesn't change the validity of his arguments.

Donnie McClurken has been targeted before this, because I remember posting something about it back when I was still posting at DU. I said words to the effect that he speaks for his own experience, not the experience of all gay people everywhere. They didn't want to hear that.

He has an amazing voice, and that's all that should matter when musical acts are being chosen for an MLK tribute.

When ten Hollywood writers who were shilling for Stalin were denied employment for refusing to testify before congress, the left was aghast that politics could be a reason for "blacklisting." Now that the left holds power, just making a joke about Obama can get you fired and blacklisted, even from being a rodeo clown.

Originally Posted by Novaheart

"Robert Oscar Lopez is currently a rising star in anti-gay circles. ThinkProgress has previously described him as "an 'ex-gay' bisexual who blames his adult social dysfunction on having been raised by a lesbian mom." Lopez's "testimonies" have been used by the likes of NOM and the American Family Association to perpetuate the erroneous idea that gay parenting is inherently related to child abuse, and increases their risks of falling victim to to exploitation and child abuse."

Originally Posted by Novaheart

I wasn't aware that you concerned yourself with the validity of arguments.

Obviously, she does more than you do. Would you care to address the substance of Lopez's arguments or continue to smear him?